Case law

People v. Eubanks

53 Cal. 4th 110 · California Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2011

. must be properly qualified . . . . … Gates (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1168, 1211 [“If the defense chooses to raise the subject, it cannot expect immunity from cross-examination on it.”].)

Mitchell v. Superior Court

37 Cal. 3d 268 · California Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1984

The Reader’s Digest article, and especially the earlier writings by the Mitchells, clearly relate to matters of public importance; they allege serious wrongdoing by a powerful private organization, and complicity by public … (For a listing as of 1980, see Comment, The Newsman’s Qualified Privilege: An Analytical Approach (1980) 16 Cal.

People v. Ngo

14 Cal. 4th 30 · California Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1996

‘Merely because an attorney has been disciplined for some infraction of the rules by which he must abide is no reason for assuming that he is not a qualified and efficient lawyer. … Although the right to counsel clearly entails a right to competent representation by a licensed attorney, and although MCLE requirements clearly do relate to professional competence, in the sense they are intended to enhance

San Diego Coast Regional Commission v. See the Sea, Limited

9 Cal. 3d 888 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 1973

However, the statement in the pamphlet, when viewed in context, shows clearly that the reference to the absence of a moratorium applied only to the post-February period and not to the period between November 8 and February … vested rights for qualifying the builder to an exemption from the requirement that he obtain a permit from the commission.

PROFESSIONAL ENG'RS IN CAL. GOV. v. Kempton

56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 814 · California Supreme Court · Apr 12, 2007

App.3d 1084, 1091 , 225 Cal.Rptr. 209 [constitutional provisions are presumed to be self-executing unless a contrary expression is clearly stated.].) … firm," and then, failing that, with the "third most qualified firm." (§ 4528, subd.

West Publishing Co. v. McColgan

27 Cal. 2d 705 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1946

It has not qualified to do intrastate business in California, During 1937, 1938 and 1939 it shipped books and other publications into this state pursuant to orders taken here by its employees. … The activities which establish its ‘presence’ subject it alike to taxation by the state and to suit to recover the tax.” The judgment is affirmed. Gibson, C.

Latipac, Inc. v. Superior Court of Marin County

64 Cal. 2d 278 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1966

If the facts clearly indicate that the contractor has “substantially” complied with the statute and that such compliance has afforded to the obligor the protection contemplated by the statute, we have rejected the obligor … of the qualifications of both partners would establish the qualications of the partnership.

Foster v. Young

172 Cal. 317 · California Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1916

But the second finding of the jury establishes a contract that the charge should be reasonable. … Counsel for defendant argue that there was no pleading of fraud or bad faith—that fraud must be alleged and must be clearly established before it is of any avail.

Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court

59 Cal. 4th 1029 · California Supreme Court · Aug 7, 2014

It is well established that CEQA compliance is not required before a legislative body submits an initiative to voters under section 9214(b). … express declaration of legislative intent, we will find an implied repeal “only when there is no rational basis for harmonizing the two potentially conflicting statutes [citation], and the statutes are ‘irreconcilable, clearly

Walker v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court · Aug 30, 2021

In order to commit someone under the Act, the state must establish four conditions: (1) the person has previously been convicted of at least one qualifying “sexually violent offense” listed in section 6600, subdivision (b … The provision governing the probable cause hearing, section 6602, subdivision (a), provides for an adversarial hearing and clearly establishes that the superior court must review the petition to determine whether the state

Fernandes v. Sacramento City Ry.

52 Cal. 45 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1877

The term “ dangerous ” was in no manner •explained or qualified by the instruction, nor was the jury informed tó what extent or under what circumstances it must have been “ dangerous,” in order to defeat a recovery. … The fact of negligence is very seldom established by such direct and positive evidence that it can be taken from the consideration of the jury and pronounced upon as a matter of law.

Wheelright v. County of Marin

2 Cal. 3d 448 · California Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1970

The clerk's certificate showed only 5,774 qualified signatures. … As we shall see, these conclusions are incorrect since the law clearly declares that the burden of proof was upon the clerk to establish the signatures were not genuine and it affirmatively appears on the face of the record

People v. McDonald

37 Cal. 3d 351 · California Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1984

None, however, is immune from criticism. … Rather, it should be accompanied by instructions clearly explaining to the jury the purpose for which it is introduced.

Doney v. Tambouratgis

23 Cal. 3d 91 · California Supreme Court · Jan 4, 1979

Conversely the employer is immunized under sections 3600 and 3601 from an action at law brought by the employee for such injury.” (Unruh v. … Nonetheless, plaintiff’s own proof established that the injury was work-related, thereby triggering defendant’s motion for nonsuit. Under such circumstances, defendant’s motion was both timely and proper.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego County District Council of Carpenters

17 Cal. 3d 893 · California Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1976

This argument clearly lacks merit. … He “would hold that only labor activity determined to be actually, rather than arguably, protected under federal law should be immune from state judicial control.”

Fair v. Stevenot

29 Cal. 486 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1866

proof being made of the record of the deed, the notice necessarily results by operation of law; but not so upon proof of possession, for the possession may be taken and held in such various modes, and accompanied by so many qualifying … Warschauer, 21 Cal. 627 , some of the language of the Chief Justice is broad enough to express the idea that possession amounted to notice, but the *491 context itself clearly shows, as does the concurring opinion of Hr.

Rider v. County of San Diego

1 Cal. 4th 1 · California Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1991

Accordingly, because the Agency that imposed the tax clearly is subject to the provisions of section 53722, and because equally clearly the tax in question is a special tax within the meaning of this section, I conclude that … Proposition 62 clearly did not intend to give the Legislature the authority to transform what would otherwise clearly be a special tax into a general tax, simply by creating a specialized agency and directing that the proceeds

Santa Barbara School District v. Superior Court

13 Cal. 3d 315 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1975

Amici curiae merely assert that the various portions of the proposition are clearly inseparable. … This case is therefore clearly distinguishable from Carlson .

Estate of Grivel

199 Cal. 351 · California Supreme Court · Sep 4, 1926

The situs of the greater portion of the estate was the republic of Mexico, and it is claimed by appellant that said property was subject to the control of the ancillary administratrix, who, it is further claimed, had qualified … Appellant was the administrator of the entire estate and of all the funds and property which came into his hands which were admittedly property and moneys belonging to the estate, and it was clearly his duty as such officer

Doughterty v. Austin

94 Cal. 601 · California Supreme Court · May 30, 1892

Therefore, giving to *626 “ regulate ” what, it seems to me, is clearly its usual meaning, I see no question in the case about unwarranted “ delegation of authority ” by the legislature. … The duties resting upon Bonneau when he qualified as county clerk and entered upon his office were plain and unmistakable; for they are enumerated in detail by the statute, and upon every principle he was bound to discharge